Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Movement pattern training compared with standard strengthening and flexibility among patients with hip-related groin pain: results of a pilot multicentre randomised clinical trial [with consumer summary]
Harris-Hayes M, Steger-May K, Bove AM, Foster SN, Mueller MJ, Clohisy JC, Fitzgerald GK
BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine 2020 Mar 23;6(1):e000707
clinical trial
6/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

STUDY DESIGN: Pilot, multicentre randomised clinical trial (RCT). OBJECTIVES: Assess viability of performing a definitive RCT and compare preliminary effects of movement pattern training (MoveTrain) and strengthening/flexibility (Standard) to improve function in people with chronic hip-related groin pain (HRGP). BACKGROUND: To determine the best physical therapist-led intervention for patients with HRGP, we must understand treatment effects of different treatment modes. METHODS: Forty-six patients (17M:29F; 29 +/- 5.3 years; body mass index 25.6 +/- 6.3 kg/m2) with HRGP were randomised. MoveTrain included task-specific training to optimise biomechanics during daily tasks. Standard included strengthening/flexibility. Treatment included 10 visits/12 weeks and home exercise programme (HEP). Primary outcomes for feasibility were recruitment, retention, treatment adherence and treatment fidelity. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported function (Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS)), lower extremity kinematics and hip muscle strength. RESULTS: We achieved target recruitment, and retention was excellent (91%). Patient session attendance was high (93%); however, reported HEP adherence (62%) was lower than expected. Physical therapists' adherence to treatment protocols was high (90%). Patients demonstrated high treatment receipt; 91% of exercises performed were rated independent. Both groups demonstrated clinically important improvements in function (HOOS) and muscle strength; however, there were no between-group differences (HOOS subscales, p >= 0.13, strength, p >= 0.34). Compared with Standard, MoveTrain demonstrated greater reductions in hip adduction (p = 0.016) and pelvic drop (p = 0.026) during a single leg squat. No adverse events were noted. CONCLUSION: Our experience in completing this RCT confirmed that a larger, multicentre RCT is feasible and highlighted modifications we will implement to optimise the future RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02913222.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help